Hi Russ, Thank you for the review. Please see inline. Cheers, Med > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Russ Housley via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> > Envoyé : lundi 2 décembre 2024 23:08 > À : gen-art@xxxxxxxx > Cc : draft-ietf-opsawg-ntw-attachment-circuit.all@xxxxxxxx; last- > call@xxxxxxxx; opsawg@xxxxxxxx > Objet : Genart last call review of draft-ietf-opsawg-ntw- > attachment-circuit-14 > > > Reviewer: Russ Housley > Review result: Almost Ready > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General > Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being > processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these > comments just like any other last call comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > <https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F% > 2Fwiki.ietf.org%2Fen%2Fgroup%2Fgen%2FGenArtFAQ&data=05%7C02%7Cmoh > amed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C685b53f6abf74b68b68f08dd131dd161%7C > 90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C638687741001881993%7CU > nknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIs > IlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sda > ta=6j%2BmVtj0pCIXWP71%2BypcZB0DQ49ltfbYsa0CyQSWiSw%3D&reserved=0> > . > > Document: draft-ietf-opsawg-ntw-attachment-circuit-14 > Reviewer: Russ Housley > Review Date: 2024-12-02 > IETF LC End Date: 2024-12-09 > IESG Telechat date: Unknown > > > Summary: Almost Ready > > > Major Concerns: None > > > Minor Concerns: > > Section 7: The text says: > > ... These protocols have to use a > secure transport layer (e.g., SSH [RFC4252], TLS [RFC8446], > and QUIC > [RFC9000]) and have to use mutual authentication. > > I assume that NETCONF and RESTCONF REQUIRE a secure transport and > mutual authentication. Is that correct? If so, can this be > written in a way that makes it clear that these other protocols > already impose these requirements? > [Med] For the context, this text comes the security template in 8407bis. Now back to the question, Yes both RESTCONF/NETCOFN has MTI security protocols, but the approach followed in 8407bis is to recommend the use of MTI, not simply listing them. The reasoning was that having an MTI does not mean that MTI is actually used/enabled. Please refer to https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/i7gUVqwHK29JbGAew9PpmibjELU/ for the full context. Hope this clarify the concern. > > Nits: > > IDnits points out some outdated references: > > == Outdated reference: A later version (-18) exists of > draft-ietf-opsawg-teas-attachment-circuit-17 > > == Outdated reference: A later version (-13) exists of > draft-ietf-opsawg-teas-common-ac-12 > > == Outdated reference: A later version (-21) exists of > draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-20 > > == Outdated reference: A later version (-11) exists of > draft-ietf-opsawg-ac-lxsm-lxnm-glue-10 > > IDnits also complains about a non-ASCII character. This is not a > concern because it appears in a name (Björklund). > > ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
